Evaluation of Drought Tolerance of Bread Wheat Genotypes after Pollination Stage by Stress and Sensitivity Tolerance Indices

Transcription

1 Advances in Environmental Biology, 5(6): , 2011 ISSN This is a refereed journal and all articles are profesonally screened and reviewed ORIGINAL ARTICLE Evaluation of Drought Tolerance of Bread Wheat Genotypes after Pollination Stage by Stress and Sentivity Tolerance Indices 1 2 Alireza Dadbakhsh, Amir Yazdan Sepas 1 Departement of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Ardabil branch, Islamic Azad Univerty, Ardabil, Iran 2 Associate Professor and asstant Professor of breeding and plant production research Institute- Karaj Alireza Dadbakhsh, Amir Yazdan Sepas,; Evaluation of drought tolerance of bread wheat genotypes after pollination stage by stress and sentivity tolerance indices ABSTRACT In order to evaluate the tolerance of bread wheat genotypes to end-season drought, an experiment was carried out by 19 genotype in the form of randomized complete blocks degn with three replications along with two separate tests, one for normal irrigation and other for end- season drought stress conditions in three regional countries including Karaj, Arak and Ardabil in agricultural years. Application of sentivity and stress tolerance indices such as MP, GMP, TOL, SSI and STI on grain yield showed that among the 19 genotypes, genotype 10 was the most derable genotype. Also, with respect to a meaningful and potive correlation between biomass weight at anthes stage and grain weight in ske in both normal irrigation and stressed conditions after the anthes stage, it is recommended that the use of grain weight in ske at anthes time in breeding programs should be condered. Key words: drought stress, tolerance index, morpho-phyological traits Introduction Although all the alive and non-alive stresses are the most factors to reducing production, drought stress is the most important factor limiting crops production in agricultural systems in arid and semi arid regions [1]. Iran is located on the world's desert belt, and is condered as the arid and semi arid region. Average rainfall in the country is about 250 mm which this is one third of average rainfall in the world, while 1.2 percent of the world's land is allocated to Iran. On the other hand, of 18.5 million hectares of agricultural lands, 6.2 million hectares (33.5%) is devoted to dry cultivation. About 1.2 million /ha of lands under dry cultivation, more than 400 mm rainfall will receive [2]. Of 2.3 million hectares of irrigated wheat in the country, in a range about 900 thousand hectares of irrigated wheat varieties are planted in cold regions [3]. In these areas, farmers do not obtained derable results in the proming irrigated cultivated varieties due to lack of sufficient water in the spring and/or lack of sufficient irrigation water allocated to agriculture by the end of the summer season and consequently wheat farming suffer the end-season drought stress [4]. Therefore, study of different traits including relative yield of genotypes under stressed and non-stressed conditions is as a starting point for understanding the drought tolerance process and selection of genotypes to improve in dry regions [5]. Gibbs [6] condered drought equivalent to the water shortage and defines it as the concept of imbalance between supply and demand of water for the plant. In order to determine how different genotypes react in stressed and non-stressed conditions [7] he divided them into four categories: 1. genotypes which have high yield in both stressed and non stressed conditions (group A) Corresponding Author Alireza Dadbakhsh, Departement of Agronomy and Plant Breeding, Ardabil branch, Islamic Azad Univerty, Ardabil, Iran Dadbakhshalireza58@ymail.com. Tel number:

2 2. genotypes which have only high yield in nonstressed conditions (group B) 3. genotypes which have only high yield in stressed conditions (group C) 4. genotypes which have poor presentation in both stressed and non-stressed conditions (Group D) 5. In Fernandez's onion, the most appropriate selection criteria is criteria that can differentiate genotypes group A from other groups. To identify genotypes reaction to stressed conditions, indices had been presented by researchers which we have referred to some of them. Stress sentivity index (SSI) which presented by Fisher and Maurer [8] and is calculated as following formula: SI=1-(Y / Y ) s p sentivity index-1 SSI= (1-( Y / Y )) /SI stress sentivity index -2 In above relations, Y is grain yield of each genotype in non-stressed conditions; Y is grain yield in stressed conditions; Ys average yield of genotypes in stressed conditions and Yp is average yield of genotypes in non-stressed conditions. Genotypes that are selected by SSI have low potential yield, but their yield is high under stressed conditions. Thus this index can not separate group A from group C, although it can separate genotypes groups B and C from other groups. TOL and MP indices: Proficiency index (MP) and tolerance index (TOL) were presented by Roelle and Hamblin [9]. It is noteworthy that the selection of stress tolerant genotypes is based on low values of TOL and high values of MP. Ung TOL and MP indices, it is posble to separate genotypes groups B and C of Fernandez from each other [9]. MP= ( Y + Y )/2 Proficiency index TOL= ( Y - Y ) Tolerance index Stress Tolerance Index (STI): It was presented by Fernandez [7] which is able to identify the genotypes group A and this index is calculated as follows: Genotype that has high STI has high drought tolerance and yield potential GMP= Y Y Geometric mean of performance -4 MP is calculated based on arithmetic average so because of presence of the relatively more intense differences between Y and Y, MP values have an oblique, while the geometric mean shows lower sentivity to relatively more intense differences between Y and Y. So in separation of genotypes group A from three other groups, GMP is more appropriate index than MP. Materials and methods In this study, 19 wheat genotypes (Table 1) derived from breeding programs of cold stations of country which have winter growth type were studied in an experiment. The experiment compared yield in the form of randomized complete blocks degn (RCBD) with three replications in both normal irrigation and stressed conditions after anthes stage in three areas (Karaj, Arak and Ardabil) in agricultural years. Each genotype was planted in a plot with m2 dimenons with 30 cm removal which was condered as marginal. Consumption Seed rate for cultivation was determined based on 450 seeds per square meter and with regard to 1000 seed weight for each genotype. Irrigation was conducted as flooding. Five stages irrigation had been condered for normal conditions and three stages were condered for stressed. In treatments under drought stress, there was no doubleirrigation after anthes. To combat broad-leaved weeds and narrow leaf weeds, mixture of Grown Star and Pumasuper herbicides were used for 20 g and 1 l/ha tillering to stem elongation stages, respectively. All the samplings were performed from the middle rows and competitor plants and in order to measuring traits other than yield per unit area, 10 plants selected randomly and then were transferred to the laboratory. Traits such as biomass of anthes time, biomass of ripeness time, grain weight per ske, 1000 seed weight, harvest index and grain yield were measured. For end season drought tolerance ung grain yield mean in normal (Yp) and stressed (Ys) conditions, indices like tolerance index (TOL), geometric mean (GMP), mean proficiency (MP), stress sentive index (SSI) and stress tolerance index (STI) was calculated. For statistical calculations, softwares such as SPSS-16, Minitab-15 and MSTAT- C were used. 2 STI= (Y Y ) / Yp Stress tolerance index -3 Geometric Mean of Performance Index (GMP): It was presented by Fernandez and is expressed as follows [7].

3 1048 Table 1: Names of under-study genotypes in this experiment Number Pedigree 1 Shahryar 2 Local Check 3 Local Check 4 Gascogene// Rsh*2/ 10120/3/ Alvd// Aldan/Las58 5 Alvd// Alaan/ las58/3/ Mv17/4/ Evwyt2/ Azd// Rsh*2/ (Alvd// Aldan/ Las)* 2/3/ Gaspard 7 Mhdv/ Soissons/4 / Bb/7C* 2/ Y50 E/ Kal*3 8 F4141- W-1- / PASTOR// PYN/ BAU 9 AU// YT542/ N10B/3/118260/4/JI/ HYS/5/YUNNATODESSKIY/6/ KS82 W409/SPN 10 ID W/ VEE/3/ URES/JUN// KAUZ/ 4BUL Basswood/ Mv17 12 Basswood/ Mv17 13 Bhr* 5/Aga//Sni/3 /Trk13/4/Gaspard 14 Gds/4/ Anza/3 Pi/ Nar// Hys/5/ Vee/ Nac/6/ Gascogne 15 Gds/4/ Anza/3 Pi/ Nar// Hys/ 5/ Vee/ Nac/6/ Gascogne 16 Omid// H7/ 4P839/3/ Omid/ Tdo/ 41CWHA /5/90 Zhong/6/OwI 17 Soissons/M- 73-4//OWI *3H-*O-*HOH 18 BILINMEYEN-6 19 SN64//SKE/2*ANE/3/SX/4BEZ/5/SERI/6/CHERVONA/7/ KLEIBER/2* FL80// DONSK POLUK Results and discuson In order to identify drought stress tolerant genotypes, stress sentive and stress tolerance indices were studied in three computation stations which presented in table 2 by the end of According to table 2, based on stress tolerance indices (STI) genotype 10 has had the most tolerance to drought. Evaluation of genotypes by SSI index had been categorized experimental materials only based on restance and susceptibility to stress, that is, ung this index we can determine sentive and tolerant genotypes regardless of their potential yield [10]. Stress sentive index was evaluated based on yield ratio of each variety in stressed conditions to non-stressed conditions as compared with the proportion in the total varieties. Thus, two cultivars with high yield or low in both conditions can have the same amount of SSI, so selection process based on this index lead reformers to make a mistake [11]. In stress sentive index (SSI), it was observed that genotype 10 had the lowest SSI amount. Based on tolerance index (TOL), genotype 10 showed higher restance to drought end season stress. In proficiency index (MP), genotype 10 showed higher tolerance to end-season stress. Also, based on geometric mean index (GMP), genotype 10 had higher tolerance to end-season stress at three locations. Behmaram et al [12] in their reports in field of evaluation of drought tolerance in spring canola cultivars expressed that STI index can better applied to evaluate drought tolerance of varieties than SSI and TOL indices. They in evaluation of drought tolerant sources in lentil genotypes in Ardabil found that of under-study indices, indices MP, GMP and STI have meaningful and potive correlation with yield in both stressed and non-stressed conditions. Baldini et al (quoting Fernandez [7]) in a study realized that there is no relation between stress sentivity index (SSI) and the grain yield. Evaluating of some drought tolerance indices in some spring barley genotypes, they reported meaningful correlation between the STI, MP and GMP in both stressed and non-stressed conditions. Roelle and Hamblin [13] showed that in most comparison experiments the correlation yield was potive between MP and YP and also between MP and YS. According to their reports, selection based on MP index generally lead to increang average yield in both normal and stress conditions. Mollasadeghi [14] in a study evaluating 12 bread wheat genotypes concluded that the indices MP, GMP, STI and MSTI having the highest correlation with yield under normal irrigation and drought stress conditions were introduced as superior indices. Listen Read phonetically Regarding Average Rating (R) of five stress sentive and stress tolerance indices, genotype 10 with Mean R = 2 was identified as best genotype in all stations. Mean R is related only to five indices MP, TOL, SSI, STI and GMP. Table 3 shows correlation coefficients between traits measured in the normal irrigation conditions ung average of three stations (Karaj, Arak and Ardabil) in agricultural years. These traits is derived from mean of three replications of the above three stations. According to observations in this table, there is negative correlation between grain yield (YLD) and biomass weight at anthes and ripeness stages and also there is potive correlation between grain yield (YLD) and seed weight per ske and 1000 seed weight. The results showed that there is meaningful and potive correlation between biomass weight at maturity stage and seed weight per ske in probability level of 1 percent, in other words increang seed weight per ske, biomass weight increases in the maturity stage. The correlation of rest traits with each other was presented in table 4. Table 4 shows correlation coefficients between traits measured under drought stress conditions ung average of three stations (Karaj, Arak and Ardabil) in

4 1049 Table 2: Rating and comparison of yield means in non-stressed (YP) conditions and drought tolerance indices 19 bread wheat genotypes Genotypes Yp R Ys R STI R SSI R TOL R MP R GMP R Mean R Mean Yp: Grain yield in normal conditions Ys: Grain yield in drought stress conditions Table 3: Correlation coefficients between traits measured in normal irrigation conditions in three stations including Karaj, Arak and Ardabil in agricultural years Biomass weight in Biomass weight Seed weight 1000 seed weight (gr) anthes stage (gr) in maturity stage(gr) per ske (gr) Biomass weight in maturity stage(gr) Seed weight per ske(gr) ** seed weight(gr) Grain yield (kg/ha) * and ** Significantly at p < 0.05 and < 0.01, respectively Table 4: Correlation coefficients between traits measured in drought stress conditions in three stations including Karaj, Arak and Ardabil in agricultural years Biomass weight in Biomass weight Seed weight 1000 seed weight (gr) anthes stage (gr) in maturity stage(gr) per ske (gr) Biomass weight in maturity stage(gr) 0.798** 1 Seed weight per ske(gr) 0.470* 0.757** seed weight(gr) Grain yield (kg/ha) * and ** Significantly at p < 0.05 and < 0.01, respectively agricultural years. These traits is derived from mean of three replications of the above three stations. According to observations in this table, there is potive correlation between grain yield (YLD) and biomass weight at anthes and 1000 seed weight and also there is negative correlation between grain yield (YLD) and biomass weight in maturity stage and seed weight per ske. The results showed that there is meaningful and potive correlation between biomass weight at maturity stage and seed weight per ske in probability levels of 5 and 1 percent. The correlation of rest traits with each other was presented in table 4. References 1. Mollasadeghi, V., M. Valizadeh, R. Shahryari and A.A. Imani, Evaluation of end drought tolerance of 12 wheat genotypes by stress indices. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 7(2): Mohammadi, R., R. Haghparast, M. Aghaei Sarbarzeh and A. Abdollahi, Evaluation of drought tolerance rate of advanced genotypes of Durum wheat on the bas of phyologic standards and other related indices.iranian agriculture sciences, 37-1: Anonymous, Annual Report. Istatistics and Information Technology General Office Ministry of Jihad-e-Agriculture, Islamic Republic of Iran (in Far). 4. Mahfuzi, S., A. Amini, M. Chaychi, S.Sh. Jasmi, M. Nazeri, M.S. Abedi Oskouei, Gh. Aminzade and M. Rezaei, Study of stability and compatibility of grain yield of winter wheat genotypes by different standard of stability under drought stress conditions in end of season. Seed and plant breeding Journal, 25-1: Farshadfar, A., M. Zamani., M. Matlabi and A. Imam Jome, Selection for drought tolerance in pea lines. Iranian agriculture sciences Journal, 32(1): Gibbs, W.J., Drought its definition, delineation and effects in drought. Special environmental report, 5: 1-39.

5 7. Fernandez, G.C.J., Effective selection criteria for assesng plant stress tolerance. In: Kuo, C.G. (Ed), Proceedings of the International Sympoum on Adaptation of Vegetables and Other Food Crops in Temperature and Water Stress, Publication, Tainan, Taiwan. 8. Fischer, R.A. and R. Maurer, Drought restance in spring wheat cultivars. Part 1: grain yield response. Aust. J. Agr. Res., 29: Roelle, A.A. and J. Hamblin, Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and nonstress environment. Crop Sci., 21: Naderi, A., E. Majidi-Hevan, A. Hashemi- Dezfoli and G. Nourmohammadi, Efficiency analys of indices for tolerance to environmental stresses in field crops and introduction of a new index. Plant and Seed Journal, 15(4): Naeimi, M., Gh.A. Akbari, A.H. Shirani Rad, S.A.M.M. Sanavi, S.A. Sadat Noori and H. Jabari, Evaluation drought tolerance in different varieties by evaluation indices of stress in end of growth season. E-Journal of production of agriculture plants, 1(3): Behmaram, R.A., A. Faraji and H. Amiri Oghan, Evaluation of drought tolerance of spring varieties (Brasca napus). Summary of essays in 9th Iranian congress of agricultural sciences and plant breeding. Univerty of Tehran. Pardis Abu-Reyhan, pp: Roelle, A.A. and J. Hamblin, Theoretical aspects of selection for yield in stress and nonstress environment. Crop Sci., 21: Mollasadeghi, V., Effect of potasum humate on yield and yield components of wheat genotypes under end seasonal drought stress condition. Thes of M.Sc in plant breeding. Islamic Azad Univerty, Ardabil branch.